By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - E3: Sony 'Leaps And Bounds Ahead' Of Microsoft

blkfish92 said:

If nintendo unveils a new smash bros. to come at launch of their new console, then yes, they win in my book.

i'll side with that as 10 points as aposed to a win but considering i wouldn't give 10 points to anyother games so a new SSB game announcement would give them one hell of a lead in my E3 reveiw and could land them the win.

who didn't know Sony kills in the IP departement? as for the win i can't say as i fill the big3 will bring it and make it harder for even me to judge as last yr i gave the win to Sony by a hair. over Nintendo.





Around the Network
Onyxmeth said:
Xen said:

No shit. In my eyes, they are leaps and bounds ahead of Nintendo as well.

Just curious but why? Nintendo in my eyes has the IP department on lock. I'd say they have an entire 2-3 tiers of IPs with more selling potential than anything Sony is able to produce. Anything we can really judge IP success by is something Nintendo crushes Sony at overall. 


Comparing the sales of Nintebndo first parts game and sony is kinda unfair. If you buy a nintendo system you buy it for the nintendo games since there 3rd party support is so bad (compared to ps360 anyway). Where as with the 360 and ps3 aswell as the first party games there is a massive number of 3rd party games.



Yeah i know my spelling sucks but im dysgraphic so live with it :3    

---------------------------------------------------Bets--------------------------------------------------

Conegamer - I say that the PS3 will beat the DS next week in Japan  (for hardware sales) Forfeit is control over others avatar for 1 week.

More does not equal better/quality.



PREDICTIONS:
(Predicted on 5/31/11) END of 2011 Sales - Xbox 360 = 62M;  PS3 = 59M;  Wii = 97M

Chibi.V.29 said:
Onyxmeth said:
Xen said:

No shit. In my eyes, they are leaps and bounds ahead of Nintendo as well.

Just curious but why? Nintendo in my eyes has the IP department on lock. I'd say they have an entire 2-3 tiers of IPs with more selling potential than anything Sony is able to produce. Anything we can really judge IP success by is something Nintendo crushes Sony at overall. 


Comparing the sales of Nintebndo first parts game and sony is kinda unfair. If you buy a nintendo system you buy it for the nintendo games since there 3rd party support is so bad (compared to ps360 anyway). Where as with the 360 and ps3 aswell as the first party games there is a massive number of 3rd party games.

I'm going to buy a Wii soon and most of the games are 3rd party I believe.



Chibi.V.29 said:
Onyxmeth said:
Xen said:

No shit. In my eyes, they are leaps and bounds ahead of Nintendo as well.

Just curious but why? Nintendo in my eyes has the IP department on lock. I'd say they have an entire 2-3 tiers of IPs with more selling potential than anything Sony is able to produce. Anything we can really judge IP success by is something Nintendo crushes Sony at overall. 


Comparing the sales of Nintebndo first parts game and sony is kinda unfair. If you buy a nintendo system you buy it for the nintendo games since there 3rd party support is so bad (compared to ps360 anyway). Where as with the 360 and ps3 aswell as the first party games there is a massive number of 3rd party games.

What is with all these people making the "if you have less choice, you'll buy what's there, and that's why it sells more," argument? Sales absolutely do not work like that



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
Mr Khan said:
Chibi.V.29 said:
Onyxmeth said:
Xen said:

No shit. In my eyes, they are leaps and bounds ahead of Nintendo as well.

Just curious but why? Nintendo in my eyes has the IP department on lock. I'd say they have an entire 2-3 tiers of IPs with more selling potential than anything Sony is able to produce. Anything we can really judge IP success by is something Nintendo crushes Sony at overall. 


Comparing the sales of Nintebndo first parts game and sony is kinda unfair. If you buy a nintendo system you buy it for the nintendo games since there 3rd party support is so bad (compared to ps360 anyway). Where as with the 360 and ps3 aswell as the first party games there is a massive number of 3rd party games.

What is with all these people making the "if you have less choice, you'll buy what's there, and that's why it sells more," argument? Sales absolutely do not work like that

I think they do, I mean the game has to be good aswell, but having less of a choice will boost the sales of what's left.



brendude13 said:
Mr Khan said:

What is with all these people making the "if you have less choice, you'll buy what's there, and that's why it sells more," argument? Sales absolutely do not work like that

I think they do, I mean the game has to be good aswell, but having less of a choice will boost the sales of what's left.

It really only has effect in the launch period, or at least it shouldn't have too much of an effect after that. You must realize that not all customers feel compelled to buy games all the time. They buy what they want, and don't buy what they don't want. It's not like "i bought the N64 with Mario 64, and now i have to buy Pilotwings because there's nothing else," you just don't buy anything else. Only a small segment of gamers will do that



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Attoyou said:
xinstantnoodlez said:
thismeintiel said:
xinstantnoodlez said:

But microsoft IPs sell millions more than Sony IPs...soooo whats the deal?

Well, I would agree with you, but you got one thing going against you.  You're wrong.


name one sony game that outsold either gears, or halo??

GT5 has now outsold gears...nothing on halo, this gen anyways.


touche...well played



"I don't know what this Yamcha is, but it sounds just like Raditz."

Mr Khan said:
brendude13 said:
Mr Khan said:
 

What is with all these people making the "if you have less choice, you'll buy what's there, and that's why it sells more," argument? Sales absolutely do not work like that

I think they do, I mean the game has to be good aswell, but having less of a choice will boost the sales of what's left.

It really only has effect in the launch period, or at least it shouldn't have too much of an effect after that. You must realize that not all customers feel compelled to buy games all the time. They buy what they want, and don't buy what they don't want. It's not like "i bought the N64 with Mario 64, and now i have to buy Pilotwings because there's nothing else," you just don't buy anything else. Only a small segment of gamers will do that

If there is only one good game in a particular genre, it would sell substantially better if there were two good games in that genre.

People don't always look for a specific game, they look for a specific genre or type of game. If there is less to choose from, the odds are, what's left will sell better.

A good example is Halo CE on the original XBOX, at that time, it was probably one of the only games worth buying on the XBOX, if the XBOX recieved as much 3rd party support as the PS2 then the sales of Halo CE would have taken a huge hit.

I understand what you mean about people only wanting to buy one specific game, but if they can't find that they buy the most similar game. I have done this myself, back in 2008 I was going to buy Tomb Raider Underworld, but then I read the positive reviews for Uncharted and played that instead, because there was more to choose from, Tomb Raider Underworld lost a sale. If Uncharted didn't exist then Tomb Raider sales would be significantly boosted.



brendude13 said:
Mr Khan said:

It really only has effect in the launch period, or at least it shouldn't have too much of an effect after that. You must realize that not all customers feel compelled to buy games all the time. They buy what they want, and don't buy what they don't want. It's not like "i bought the N64 with Mario 64, and now i have to buy Pilotwings because there's nothing else," you just don't buy anything else. Only a small segment of gamers will do that

If there is only one good game in a particular genre, it would sell substantially better if there were two good games in that genre.

People don't always look for a specific game, they look for a specific genre or type of game. If there is less to choose from, the odds are, what's left will sell better.

A good example is Halo CE on the original XBOX, at that time, it was probably one of the only games worth buying on the XBOX, if the XBOX recieved as much 3rd party support as the PS2 then the sales of Halo CE would have taken a huge hit.

I understand what you mean about people only wanting to buy one specific game, but if they can't find that they buy the most similar game. I have done this myself, back in 2008 I was going to buy Tomb Raider Underworld, but then I read the positive reviews for Uncharted and played that instead, because there was more to choose from, Tomb Raider Underworld lost a sale. If Uncharted didn't exist then Tomb Raider sales would be significantly boosted.

Point, but now we're talking about similarity in genre, which is a valid argument, but a different one than what has been made here (that so many games in different genres across Sony's first-party works is why none of them have sold spectacularly)



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.